10) Emmitt Smith (would have loved to see Sanders behind that line)9) Gale Sayers (Is it just me but alot of his highlights are returns)8) OJ Simpson7) Eric Dickerson (a big back with awesome speed)6) Earl Campbell ( I loved watching him run he made the defenders fear hitting him)5) LaDainian Tomlinson ( all he does is scores Touchdowns)4) Marshall Faulk ( He changed the way the running back was looked at)3) Jim Brown (he was the best at his time)2) Walter Payton ( He was just pure Sweetness)1) Barry Sanders ( This is one guy I would find time to watch, and also how can't he be #1 when he spent his career as the main focus of the defense. Also I loved how he conducted himself on and off the field)

Well I am sure I will get a lot of arguments but that's what I feel and yes a little bias to the ones I actually seen with my eyes.

My beef with the NFL list would stem from the omission of Marshall Faulk. Faulk is the most underrated running back in NFL History. He was a 1,000-yard threat running and receiving from 98-01. Props to Hazer for recognizing Faulk’s achievements. Many people overlook him.

My beef with the NFL list would stem from the omission of Marshall Faulk. Faulk is the most underrated running back in NFL History. He was a 1,000-yard threat running and receiving from 98-01. Props to Hazer for recognizing Faulk’s achievements. Many people overlook him.

He wasn't the receiving threat, but it's a list of running backs and with the mention of Marshall Faulk, why not mention Curtis Martin as well? Martin had more 1,000 yard seasons than Faulk.

He wasn't the receiving threat, but it's a list of running backs and with the mention of Marshall Faulk, why not mention Curtis Martin as well? Martin had more 1,000 yard seasons than Faulk.

aw shit.

It all comes down to marketability. More people knew about Marshall Faulk over Curtis Martin due to the teams success. Just like Ray Lewis gets all the credit when London Fletcher has equal or better stats.

Also was said many times by Kurt Warner that Faulk would call out the defenses to help him out. You give me a wr to average 72 receptions a year for 10 years, I would be happy. You give me a running back giving me 1200 yards and 10tds a year for 10 years I would be happy, and you got both in one person. Remember the Colts were crap until he got drafted and His 2nd season he helped get them to the AFC Championship game which the refs gave to the Steelers.

His 1st year in St. Louis he won the Super Bowl.

So yes I believe he is one of the best all time.

But yet Gale Sayers is in their list with less than 6000 yards and as I stated he is more noted for returns, look at his wiki page they don't even give his rushing stats on the side, they have returns.

He wasn't the receiving threat, but it's a list of running backs and with the mention of Marshall Faulk, why not mention Curtis Martin as well? Martin had more 1,000 yard seasons than Faulk.

Faulk had five straight seasons of 80-plus receptions. He had a four-year run where he averaged almost 900 yards receiving. In a couple of those years, he very likely would've eclipsed the 1,000-yard mark if he didn't sit out or miss games. Versatility matters, especially among running backs, which is why many hold Gale Sayers in such high regard.

Faulk is one of the most versatile players in the history of the game and that gives him an edge over a player the caliber of Martin. I like Martin. Great career, but he didn’t make more impact than Faulk did. Faulk had nearly twice as many receiving yards as Martin. He also has 20,000 yards from scrimmage, which is more than Martin's 17,000. He scored 136 touchdowns, which I believe ranks fourth all-time among running backs. He was also a very good blocker if I recall.

It all comes down to marketability. More people knew about Marshall Faulk over Curtis Martin due to the teams success. Just like Ray Lewis gets all the credit when London Fletcher has equal or better stats.

I think Marshall Faulk played most of his career home games indoors (Colts/Rams) and Curtis Martin (Patriots/Jets) played his outdoors and still had more 1,000 yard seasons ... without the NFL MVP throwing the ball or being a part of "Greatest Show on Turf".

I never understood why London Fletcher didn't get much respect. Maybe cuz he's 5'10"? I'm not saying that's a valid reason.

Faulk had five straight seasons of 80-plus receptions. He had a four-year run where he averaged almost 900 yards receiving. In a couple of those years, he very likely would've eclipsed the 1,000-yard mark if he didn't sit out or miss games. Versatility matters, especially among running backs, which is why many hold Gale Sayers in such high regard.

Faulk is one of the most versatile players in the history of the game and that gives him an edge over a player the caliber of Martin. I like Martin. Great career, but he didn’t make more impact than Faulk did. Faulk had nearly twice as many receiving yards as Martin. He also has 20,000 yards from scrimmage, which is more than Martin's 17,000. He scored 136 touchdowns, which I believe ranks fourth all-time among running backs. He was also a very good blocker if I recall.

The receiving stuff is great, but this list is about running backs. You gonna hold it against Jim Brown cuz he doesn't have the receiving yards and catches?

I'm not disputing Faulk's value, just saying his receiving talents don't merit any place in this discussion.

You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.